The Sun. — London, England, 1836-06-02 00:00:00

SECON D EDITION. SUN OFFICE, Seven o'Ciock. IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT, HOUSE OF LORDS. The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat on the woolsack at a Quarter past Four o'Clock. Mr. TOOKE and others, from the House of Commons, brought up the North Midland Railway Bill, the Loudon and Croydon Railway Bill, a Bill to enable the Birmingham Coal Company to sue and be sued, and the Consolidated Fund Bill. Lord RAVENSWORTH presented a petition from South Shields, against the South Durham Railway Bill. Lord LORTON presented a petition from Galway, in fa vour of Municipal Reform. Lord DUNDA S presented a petition from Kingston-upon- Hull, in favour of Poor Laws in Ireland. Also, petitions from the same place and York, in favour of the North Mid land Railway, and the Great Northern Railway. The Duke of CLEVELAND presented a petition from Durham, praying the House to grant proper Reform in the Municipal Corporations of Ireland. The petitioners viewed with great regret the decision of the House with respect to the Municipal Reform Bill for Ireland—it had created great alarm throughout the country, and was fraught with the most imminent danger. Lord KEN YON presented a petition in favour of the Grand Junction Railway. The Noble Lord gave notice that he should move the third reading of the Bill on Thursday next. The Consolidated Fund Bill wastread a first, and ordered to be read a second time. The Bills on the Table were for warded a stage. BUILDING WORKHOUSES. Lord E L LE NB 0 ROUG IF presented a petition from a pa rish in Essex, praying for an extension of the time to 20 years, for the repayment of the money' borrowed under the new Poor Law Act, for the building of workhouses. The Noble Lord begged to ask the Noble Viscount opposite whether it was the intention of his Majesty's Goverrzment to extend the time. Lord MELBOURNE said that since the Noble Lord had asked the same question bef or c, the subject had,been:under the consideration of the Govern rt tent, who had determined to extend the time, and he believe( i that fact had been announced by the Secretary of State for the. Home Department in another place. TheWanstead Chapel of Eas e Bill went through Committee. SUGAR DUTIES. Lord CL ARE rose to present the petition of which he had given notice from the East India Company, pray ing for an equalization a the duties on East and West India Sugar. The N able Lord trusted that his Ma jesty's Ministers would take th e subject unto their most serious consideration. In his opiniol 3, at the present time the position of the East India Company cla 5 med the peculiar consideration of the House, for since the pass ..fing of the last charter the whole charges of the Government •of India were thrown upon the resources of India. In concl tision, the Noble Lord begged to ask the Noble Viscount whe t her it was the intention of his Majesty's Government to intrc c luce any measure on the subject ? Viscount MELBOURNE said that the subject was one which required great considtm :ration and sound legislation._ ( Hear, hear.) His Majesty) ; Ministers were as sensible as the' Noble Lord could be a the importance of the measure. i They intended to consider the • subject, and to introduce a mea sure which he trusted would b a satisfactory to all parties. Lord SEAFORD did not think there was any surplus sugar in the East Indies—ic.' the merchants were allowed to send their sugar to this nu irket, they must import as much from some other place, so • that the country would not be benefited in any way while ; the West Indies would be much damaged ; that would be an vasion of the law, but still it was one which would take place. If there was any surplus sugar then, if it was their Lordship ' pleasure, let them put the cul tivatcr of the East Indies on. the same footing as the cultiva tor in the West Indies. But a tno former time was it so import ant that the West Indies she u Id receive the succour and sup port of the mother country, n o iv when a vast and most benignant experiment was in operat it at, most successfully he be lieved, so far as it had . hitherto gone, thanks to the governors and the officers whose duty it was to carry the new law into effect • hr it still the matter had not gone far enough for one to make certain of the result. He would leave the matter after these few words in the hands of the Go vernment,'and of the House, , to deal with it as they thought fit. Lord E LE NBOROU •••GH, although he had attended to the statement of the Noble "Viscount, was entirely ignorant of what the intention of his M :s• jesty's Government was. His con striction of the Slave Ema it ipation Bill was, that it placed the people of the East and West Indies on the same footing. He believed that the assimilation of the duties on articles of East and Vies India produce was no longer a question of principle, but of time ; and the people of the East Indies had, in his opi a ion, peculiar claims upon the con sideration of the British G o vernment. He trusted, therefore, that the question would r e ceive a full and equitable consi deration. The Marquis of NORT!" HAMPTON thought the question was one upon which they - should proceed with great caution, until they had ascertained. • what the result of the 'great expe riment would be which t 7as at present nuking in the West t : formilitv, and the convers a tion dropped. • The .. I‘l.lrquis of LA N SDOWNE presented a pctithn priying fa- the abolition d capital punishment. The Marquis of NOR I 'HAMPTON, on the part of the Duke of Richmond, may- 1 for certain returns connected with the Post-office Inquiry.— -. Agreed to. Their Lordships then a ijourned. HO U.S E OF COMMONS. The SPEP.KER took tI e chair shortly before four o'clock. MEDW kY NAVIGATION. Oa the motion of Ni ir. HODGES the Committee on this Bill obtained leave to re port on or before the 16th of June. Lord STORMONT presented a petition from Norwich in favour of the South Dui +tam Railtir~y. LONDON AND CAMBRIDGE RAILWAY. On the motion of Mr.. WARD, this Bill was read a second time. TIAVERFORI )WEST BRIDGE BILL. Mr. SCHOLEFIEL .D brought up the report of the Com mittee on this Bill, stati vg that the Standing Orders had been complied with. WESTMINSTUR SMALL DEBTS' BILL. Mr. TOOKE moved that, the petition presented by him from Mr. Arthur Morris, hif ;h bailiff of Westminster, against the Westminster Small De its.' Bill, be referred to the Committee on the Bill. 'The SPEAKER was understood to say that the Bill had been postponed, and the. %notion was accordingly withdrawn. WELLS (NOR FOLK) HARBOUR BILL. Sir W. FOLKES bi •onght up the Report of the Committee on this Bill. SOUTH PETrHERTON INCLOSURE. Oa the motion of Mr. A. SANDFORD the Lords' amend ments on this Bill we :re agreed to : and, on the motion of the same Hon. Membc r the Parret Navigation Bill was read a third time and passed . WESTMINSTER SMALL DEBTS' BILL. Mr. J. JERVIS pi, -sented a petition from St. Ann's West minster, in favour of tbet Westminster Small Debts' Bill. IRISH FISERIES. Mr. H. TWISS zn.oved the third reading of the Irish Fisheries Bill. On the motion of Lord SANDON a clause was added by way of rider. The Bill was then rt !ad a third time and passed. DUBLIN ANL) DROGHEDA RAILWAY. Mr. O'CONNEL L, as Chairman of the Dublin and Drogheda Railway Committee, moved that the Committee have leave to report oil or before the 20th of June. After a few words from Mr. EMERSON TENNENT, Mr. O'CONNEL'i, said the examination and cross-exami nation ban .un to such a length that the extension of time was absolutely necessary. —Motion agreed to. Sir R. VYVY.' brought up the Report of the Bristol Damages Compera ation Mr. M. PHI lA:2S presented a petition frog en individual, complaining of the charge upon vessels passing Liverpool, and .praying to be heard before the Liverpool Dock Committee by himself or agents. Mr. T. DUNCOMBE presented a petition from Captain Bradley, complaining of his dismissal from the army. In presenting the petition the Hon. Member would take that op portunity of giving notice that he should postpone his motion for the appointment of a Select Committee to enquire into the cause of that dismissal until Colonel Arthur arrived. He hoped. his Majesty's Ministers, when he did arrive, w ould see the necessity of entering into the charges contained in the petition. The Hon. Member also presented rietitions from Finsbury, Drogheda, the Bahama Islands, e nd other places, testifying to the good conduct of Captair, Bradley, and praying for an inquiry. Mr. WILKES presented a petition from Glenelly in favour of the removal of the Dissenters' grievances : also a petition from the Boston Public Library, praying for the repeal of the duties on Newspapers. CHURCH RATES. Mr. WILKS also presented a petition from the Dissenters of Reading, in Berkshire, on the subject of the enormous Church -rates, levied underi local Acts of Parliament, in the town of Great Marlow, in the county of Buckingham, praying that a Commission might be assembled to investigate the ac counts of the trustees under these Acts, and praying also that all Church-rates might be abolished. OBSERVANCE OF THE LORD'S DAY. Mr. L AWSON presented a petition from Knaresborough, praying for the better observance of the Lord's Day. HAND-LOOM WEAVERS. Mr. GILLON presented a petition from the hand-loom weavers of several places in Scotland, for legislati ve p rotection ; also from Jas. Hutchinson, spirit-dealer, complaining of certain hardships with regard to the Spirit Licences Act, and praying for its revision ; also a petition from certain Spirit dealers of Kilmarnock to the same effect. The Hon. Member also pre sented a petition most numerously and respectably signed by his constituents, stating that in the boroughs of England the right of voting for town Magist ra t e s was extended' to the house holders, and praying that a similar right might be ex tended to Scotland. In this prayer he fully concurred, and would take an opportunity. in the present session, of bringing the subject under the consideration of the House. IRISH MUNCIPAL REFORM. Mr. HARLAND presented a petition from some place in the county of Durham, praying that a measure of Municipal Reform, on the basis of the Bill passed for regulating the English Corporations, might be extended to Ireland.—(Loud cheering from the Ministerial side from the House.) iriviik) CORPORATION REFORM (IRELAND.) Mr. FRENCH presented a petition signed by upwards of A C f j(711.11 1 ... 1,000 inhabitants of Sligo, praying that the measure of Cor porate Reform which had passed the House of Commons, might be carried into a law, and that the , House would not adopt the amendment of the Lords. TITHES (IRELAND.) . . The Hon. MEMBER presented another petition from Sligo, numerously and respectably signed, praying for the total abolition of the tithe system in Ireland. The petitioners stated that no mitigation of tithes would have the effect of satisfying the people ; but in this respect the Hon. Member differed with them, because he was sure the Bill introduced by his Majesty's Ministers, if carried into effect, would tran quillise Ireland. Colonel PE RCE VAL bad looked over the signatures to the petitions which had just been presented, which were cer tainly numerously signed, but they did not contain the natn( s of the respectable inhabitants of the town of Sligo. To the petition praying for Corporate Reform, he found the names of some individuals by whom he had been authc rised to oppose that measure when before the House of Commons. They might have changed their minds— ( Loud cheers from the Ministerial benches) ;--but the prin ciple upon which that Bill had been introduced was calculated to add considerable expense to parties residing within the pre cincts of the borough of Sligo, without giving them any ad vantage whatever. Mr. O'CONNELL said the town of Sligo consisted of 15,000 inhabitants, and the Corporation of 12 persons. Now he (Mr. O'C.) supposed that the parties who instructed the Hon. Member to oppose this petition were the 12 composing the Cor poration.—( Hear, hear.) The Hon. Member had stated that persons who had signed the petition had changed their minds. If the Hon. Member would imitate their example in this repect, it would be a consummation most devoutly to be wished.— ( A laugh. ) The O'CONOR DON supported the prayer of the peti tion, and denied the statement of the Hon. Member for Sligo, that the petitioners were not respectable. IRISH TITHES—RATHCORMAC SLAUGHTER. Mr. O'CONNELL presented a petition, signed by three cf the widows of the victims of the Rathcormac massacre, and a number of other persons, praying. the House to put au end to the shedding of blood in Ireland by abolishing. tithes. He had also a variety of petitions from se veral parishes in the city and county of Kilkenny and other parts of Ireland on the same subject. CHURCIFRATES. Mr. BAINES presented a petition from the Dissenters of Broadstairs, praying for the abolition of Church Rates. PAPER DUTIES. Mr. BAINES presented a petition from the booksellers and printers of Leeds praying for a drawback on paper. Mr. V. STUART presented a petition from a clergyman in the county of Waterford, complaining that his parish church was out of repair, and that be had no means of repairing it.— ( Hear, hear, from Col. Perceval.) He (Mr. Stuart) under stood the object of that cheer; it had reference to the appro priation clause. He could not, however, concur in the prayer of the petition. IRISH CORPORATIONS. Mr. CHAPMAN presented seven petitions from different parishes in Westmeath, on the subject of the Irish Corpora tions. The petitioners all stated with one accord that they would infinitely rather that no Bill for the reform of Irish Corporations would pass that session, than that they should be placed upon a different footing from their English and Scotch neighbours.—( Hear.) Mr. MORG AN JOHN 0' CONN E L L presented petitions from Listowdll, and four other places in Kerry, praying the House not to adopt the Irish Corporation Bill as sent down from the Lords.—( Hear. ) Mr. MARK PHILLIPS had a petition to present which was both bulky and important.—( Hear.) The petition bad been in his possession only half an hour, as his constituents of the town of Manchester were anxious that it should be pre sented on that evening, which bad been set apart for the dis cussion of the important Bill sent up by that:House to the other branch of the Legislature, relative to the Corporations of Ire land.—( Cheers.) It was only on Tuesday last that the inhabi tants of Manchester had been roused upon the subject, and in a single day it had received the signatures of 29,663 persons. (Loud cheering from the Ministerial Benches.) Ile had, therefore, felt it his duty to present it to that House without loss of time. The petitioners stated that they felt great sorrow and deep indignation on bearing the manner in which the Lords had mutilated the Bill which had been sent up to them for the Reform of the Irish Corporations. —( Hear.) They prayed the House not to consent that such a measure of injus tice might be inflicted upon Ireland, And that they would not recognise any measure for Ireland, but one of equal jus tice, and of as great magnitude as England and Scotland had obtained. He was not a friend to organic changes. The SPEAKER suggested to the Honourable Member, whether it would not be more adviseable to attend to the general understanding of the House—to abstain from raising a debate on the presentation of a petition. Mr. PHILIPS would only say then that he fully concurred in the sentiments and prayer contained in the petition. Mr. BROTHERTON also fully supported the petition. He had looked over the signatures, and, from his local know ledge, could' say they were most respectable. Mr. W. O'BRIEN was aware of the understanding alluded to by the Speaker; but he hoped to be allowed to return his sincere thanks, in behalf of Ireland, to Manchester and ether towns which had nobly stirred thtnwaelve; or, this ocew,;. - ni. - 'MTN' r; Said there was no doubt but some limits were very properly necessary on the presentation of petitions, but this was a most extraordinary circumstance—here was a whole community roused by the conduct of the Lords upon this Bill, and praying that Ireland might have justice.—( Cheers.) ABOLITION OF TITHES. Petitions praying for the total abolition of tithes were presented by Dr. Baldwin from Cork, by Mr. Bel lew from the county of Louth ; by Mr. Walker, from Wexford, by Mr. Brady, from Newry; by Mr. Fitz simon, from Dublin ; by Mr. O'Brien, from Limerick ; by Mr. S. Barry, from the county of Cork ; by Mr. Morgan O'Connell, from the county of Meath ; and by Major Mac namara, from the county of Kildare. IRISH CORPORATION REFORM. Mr. MORGAN O'CONNELL presented a petition agreed to at a public meeting of the county of Meath, con vened by the High Sheriff, and most numerously and re spectably attended, praying that House to pass a measure of Corporate Reform for Ireland, based upon the principle of popular election SEE OF DURHAM. Mr. BETHEL presented a petition from Durham, praying for the better regulation of the revenues of the See of Durham. Mr. HUME presented a petition from Van Diemen's Land, which contained a number of allegations generally against the conduct of Col. Arthur ; but as his Majesty's Govern ment had removed that officer, he did not think it was necessary to enter into any of the many com plaints in the petition, except calling the attention of the Government to that part which prayed for an alteration in the laws of the Colony. ECCLESIASTICAL COURTS. Mr. Sergeant GOULBURN obtlin ,, d leave to bring in a Bill to amend the law in ecclesiastieal matters; awl to consolidate and amend the Courts for the probate of wills and granting letters patent throughout England and Wales. ENGLISH TITHES. An HoN. MEMBER begged to ask what day the English Tithe Bill would be printed, and in the hands of Members. Lord J. RUSSELL said the Bill was printed, and he believed it would be distributed to-morrow. IRISH TITHES—ADJOURNED DEBATE. The Order of the Day for the adjourned debate on the Irish Tithe Commutation Bill having been read, Mr. BARRON felt it his duty, as a resident of Waterford, to contradict the statements that had been made in the debate of last night relative to the sentiments of the gentry of that country, both Protestant and Catholic.—( Hear, hear.) They were, he was fully convinced, most anxious that a Bill such as that which had been introduced by his Majesty's Government should receive the assent of that House. All the most influential landed proprietors, all the men of pro perty and station—the magistracy, and even the clergy in his part of the county—were most anxious that the measure of his Majesty's Government should pass; and that this question should be finally settled.—( Hear.) There could not be a greater delusion practised on the people of England, than to say that this was a Catholic feeling - . He could assure the House and the English people, tinit Prote.tanLi of /cciand were heartily sick of agitation, and so were the Catholics of property and station.—( Hear, hear, from the Opposition.) But they knew well that this question would never be settled on the principles laid down by the Noble Lord or the Right Hon. Gentlemen opposite. They knew those prin ciples to be unjust, and they would not be parties to injustice. It would not be denied that all, or at least nineteen twen tieths of the Church property in Ireland had been originally appropriated by the Roman Catholic owners to Roman Ca tholic purposes ; it had since been diverted to different purposes, but he would ask; was it more than common justice to restore a small part of this property to the purposes for which which it was originally intended ? The Noble Lord had supposed that the course which he pro posed was one which all men would agree in adopting; he had fancied it was some middle course which lie was clever enough to bring forward, which would create a sort of compromise—( Hear, hear)—but so far from it, he (Mr. Barron) was bound to say the Noble Lord had brought forward no new point, and no new argument that could con vince any man in or out of the House, that the Noble Lord's system ought to be adopted in preference to the Bill of the Government. The Noble Lord had brought forward his mo tion for the purpose of embarrasssing, and not for the purpose of finally sestling,:the Irish question. The Noble Lord had ridiculed the idea of the Bill of the Government being a final measure ; but he would ask the Noble Lord whether be expected that his Bill would be anything like a final mea sure after the resolution of the House of Commons. The Noble Lord must know too well the feelings of the people of Ireland, to suppose that it would lead to a final settlement of the question in Ireland. If Hon. Gentlemen opposite said it was to be a final measure, he would ask them what they meant by a final measure ?—( Hear, from the Op position.) He wanted to know if there was any law that conld he called a measure in th e very nature o f t h e Consti tution. Common sense must be th e b as i s o f t h e i r l eg i s l at i on before they epouurldsueexdpeheyt theto kieteigphttheHcoonuntßrya• ro g n u e ie t t. tha l t ha d drawn was ad system men y3tern of property into the whi r l poo l o f ag i tat i on, they knew knew they had to deal with an inflammable, a high minded, and a brave people, and let them beware how they trifled with such a people much longer. If they persevered in their mischievous course, they would drew men of property out of the country or into the ranks of agi tation. They had too long treated Ireland as a conquered pro vince, and they seemed to forget that there were 6 or 7,000,000 of Roman Catholics who lived within its boundaries. He calculated the church property in Ireland to amount to 760,000/. % and all they asked was, that of this 60,000/. shouldbe THE S wropriated to the purposes for which it was originally in tended. This would leave 700,0001. for the spiritual instruc tion of the Protestants of Ireland. It would cost 1/. per head, whilst in France, where no complaint was made of the want of spiritual instruction, he had reason to know, from calcula tions made by men of considerable experience, that it cost at fie rate of 2s. per head; and in Scotland the cost was 2s. 6d. Ha implored the other side of the House, if they wished to save Ireland from the troubles that threatened to disturb that country, to come to a compromise with his Majesty's Go vernment on this vitally important question. The Noble Lord last night had stated that he should not allow the prin ciple of diminishing the Clergy in Ireland, but he begged leave to tell the Noble Lord that he had already conceded the principle, for he had diminished the Bishops in the whole of Ireland.—( Loud cneers.) If they diminishdd them because they had not work sufficient, why not diminish a portion of the clergy where it was found they had nothing to do. It was notorious that in many of the benefices there were only five, ten, or twenty Protestants. It was the rich dignitaries and the wealthy priests who ruined the Church in France—who ruined the Catholic Church in this country, and who were now doing so in Spain and Portugal. This Bill was in favour of the Church in Ireland, for by it there would not be any too fine gentlemen—any hu fling parsons, probably; but there would be resident clergy men in every part of Ireland, who would be beloved and respected by both Protestants and Catholics. The peo ple of England were now too enlightened to suppose that the Church consisted of great and wealthy dignitaries. They knew now that the cry was raised by the spirit of mammon— the cry was, that the Church was in danger, but it was for the filthy lucre—it was mammon that was at the bottom of the cry. the people of Ireland knew that the Noble Lord's whole ob ject was to undermine the Government in the hope that in the midst of the scramble he might come in for some place or other, but they would not be deceived by his profession. (LEFT SITTING.) General Lord Ludlow is to be appointed to the 3d Regiment of Guards, vacant by the death of the Duke of Gordon. Lord Ludlow is a very old general officer, aid has always been a steady and consistent Liberal. He lost his arm while serving with the Guards in Holland, and af.erwards commanded a brigade of Guards throughout the campaign in Egypt. General Ross, now Governor of Guerh sey, is to have the vacant regiment, and Major-General Ellice 14 to be appointed Lieutenant-Governor of Guernsey in his lace. 'N, LONDON, THURSDAY, JUNE 2, .1836. Noble Friend's own calculation. The annual income derived from tithes in Ireland, according to that calculation, was 353,000/. ; from glebes, 86,000/. ; from • ministers' money, 10,000/. ; and from some other source the small sum of 5,0001., making in the whole 459,0001. This was the total income derived from every source by the parochial clergy of Ire land.--( Cheers.) This was the total amount paid for the support and maintenance of the Protestant religion in that country.--(Loud cheers.) Now, what provis►on did this sum make for every clergyman, supposing that they were all paid equally ? There were 1,380 benefices. It was true that his Noble Friend proposed to reduce the number to 1,250. But, taking the number as it was at present, in 1830 there would be an average income of 2551. a-year for every Clergyman. Now, before he went further, he would lay it down that a gentleman of education, having a family to sup port and bring up, and having no other means by which he could make an addition to his income, ought not to have a less income than 3001. a-year. This, he thought, could not be considered au absurd minimum. He looked upon it as only a decent competency—( Cheers.) No parochial clergyman ought to have less. The clergyman had not only to live like a gentleman, and contribute to the wants of his neighbours, but he had also to look to a provision for those he was to leave behind him.—( Cheers.) He was now appealing to the House of Commons as gentlemen—(Cheers)—and he would tell them that there were in the Church, and in the condition he had described, men of as nice feelings as gentlemen as any to whom he was now addressing himself.—(Cheers.) He (Lord Stanley) would assume that :300/. was not too much for each parochial clergyman. His Noble Friend proposed to reduce the number of benefices to LTA ; but there were nu merous applications in Ireland to have new churches built, and he wished to know, was it intended that there should be a clergyman to each church ? If that there to be the case, and supposing the number of places of worship in creased by the building of new churches to 1,500, there would then be only an average income for each clergyman of 230/. a year from tithes, and altogether an income of only 3321. a year; 1,534 places of worship would average 2501. a year to each clergyman in Ireland. His Noble Friend might turn and twist the subject as he pleased ; he would find that he could not shake the accuracy of this calculation.—( Cheers. ) He ( Lord Stanley) would defy contradiction to his statement. His Noble Friend proposed first to reduce the number of be nefices to 1,250, and then to assign the duties of these bene fices to 1,009 gentlemen, with a graduated scale of income, the maximum being 3001. He found by this scale that his Noble Friend would give to 79 clergymen an income below 2001. a-year, and his Noble Friend was actually prepared to bind himself down to starve 129 clergymen on an income of 100/. a year.—( Cheers.) He thought he had satisfactorily shown,by the total amount of the income of the Church of Ire land, that so far from its being a bloated, pampered Church, it had scarcely the means of affording a decent competency to its parochial clergy.—(Cheers.) Now what he would propose as a better arrangement than that in the contemplation of his Noble Friend would be this :—Suppose the number of be nefices to be 1,250, out of that number he would allot an income of 300/. a yeas to each of 800 benefices, where the Protestant population did not exceed 500 in each. To a second class of parochial clergy, where the Protestant population did not exceed 2,000, he would give an in come of 4001. a year ; and where the Protestant population exceeded 2,000, he would give to each Clergyman an income of 500/. a year. Let this be the height to which any Clergy man's revenue could extend. Now if this small scale of in comes were adopted it would only exceed the total amount of income stated to belong to the Church by 5,0001. a year.— (Loud cheers.) Besides the deductions made by the Church Temporalities Bill, his Noble Friend proposed a further deduc tion of tao-and-a-half per cent. Why this was to be done he could not tell, but it seemed that when the income exceeded a certain sum, or supposed zero, there was to be a deduction of two-and-a-half per cent. His Noble Friend said that there were two many benefices in Ireland, and therefore he would reduce them to 1,250. Now he (Lord Stanley) would deal with the whole subject both of Propestant population and number of benefices, and he would show that the number of benefices was not too great. Taking an average of the Protestant population, there was the number of 700 to each benefice. Lord J. RUSSELL, as we understood, said that he dis agreed with this average. Lord STANLE Y—The entire Protestant population of Ireland was given at 852,000, which, divided by 1,250, the number of benefices, made an average population to each be nefice of 699, being within a fraction of 700.—( Cheers.) Now, what was the area over which the la.lsettr of the paro chial clergy who were thus paid was extended ? He would give the House a few examples. Iu the average of all great towns the duties of the parochial clergy extended over an area of 10,000 acres, or fifteet square miles to ev3ry benefice. Taking it in this view, there wau:d to 1,236 benefices not having each an income of more than S5O/. a year, whose du ties extended to a Protestant posulatii.n of 700, and over an area of fifteen square miles. Ho defied his Noble Friend, or any other Hon. Gentleman, to contradict his figures. He hoped this calculation, for the accuracy of which he pledged himself, would make an impression up >n those who might have led away by fallacious and delusive representations. Ile knew he had trespassed much upon the a'tention of the ILstis ,, , and he was sorry to say that he should feel it necessary for him to trespass on it for some time longer.—( Cheers). It had been said that in the diocese cf Cloyne there were several livings which lay close together, and this he dist not deny ; but he entreated the House not to take a one-sided view of the sub ject. He would show them how the matter stood on the other side, and he should take all his calculations and data frosts the Report of the Commissioners, which had been laid upon the table. In the diocese of Clogher there was a be nefice with a Protestant population of 3,756, covering an area or twenty-one miles in length, and three miles in breadth, and the total gross income for four Clergymen who did the duty there was only 5001. a year.—( Cheers.) In another benefice there was a Protestant population of '2,023 persons, extending over an area of 29 miles, havin:s three churches and two schools. Another benefice had 1,518 Protestants, and was 15 miles in length and 11 miles broad. The living of Granard had been spoken of as producing the enormous income of 1,3601. But, allowing for deductions, it produced in tact but 9001. a year. Now this was divided into five parishes, having a Protestant population in each varying from 692, the highest number, to 265, the lowest number. Each parish had a sepa rate church, and there were six clergymen to do the duty. So that there were five churches and six clergymen to be supported on a net income of 9001. a year. In the County of Meath there were six parishes, with a Protestant population of 1,287, over an area of 22 miles lOng and six broad, with six clergymen doing the duty, and only a gross income to support the whole of 3851. a year. In Armagh there was a benefice of eleven miles long and ten broad, with a population of 4,334 Protest ants, and having four Clergymen to do the duty. Another, with a Protestant population of 3,658, covering an area of 15 miles long, and 10 miles and a half broad, having one Church and two chapels. He could supply the House with a multitude of other instances of a similar kind ; but why should he weary them with a repetition of notorious and indisputable facts ? ( Cheers.) In the cases he had mentioned he had not in cluded any towns. He could give one instance where the benefice covered a space of forty miles long, and sixteen wide, and the income of the Clergyman was only 1701. a year. Was it possible, he asked, for any Clergyman with such a limited income to discharge his duty properly under such circum stances ?—( Cheers.) In the diocese of Tuam there was the living of Balnikill, in the district of Connemara, one point of which was fifty miles distant, and the nearest point was net within a shorter distance than 27 miles. He could give many more instances, but he should not weary the House. —( Cheers. ) He would now call to the recollection of the House the reso lution which had been passed upon a former occasion.— ( Hear.) The object of that resolution was said to have been a final settlement of the whole qnestion affecting the Church of Ireland. He did not see how the measure now proposed could be a final settlement of that question--( Cheers from the Ministerial benches.) He thanked them for that cheer. It proved that they did not themselves view it as a final settle ment, or likely to lead to a final settlement. Ministers ought to estimate duly, and he supposed they did, the nature of the support they received from some of the Hon. Gentlemen op posite.—(Cheers.) Could his Noble Friend opposite (Lord Morpeth) tell him how many petitions had been presented, praying that the question of the Irish Church should be brought to a final settlement ? Was there even one such peti i'tion ?—( Cheers from the Opposition benches.) Were there not, on the contrary, numerous declarations that there could be no final settlement, that there could be no peace for Ireland, that nothing less would do than a total abolition of tithe? Such was the object of those from whom Ministers derived their support. It was impossible to deny that such was the object. The fact could not be concealed. Those who gave such stre nuous support to Ministers announced distinctly that they must have the whole—(Cheers)---that there could not otherwise he a final settlement, that there should be not. His Noble Friend the Secretary for Ireland called this a final measure. A final measure ! Why, by the very Bill itself it was pro vided that the operation of it should terminate in seven years. --(Lord Morpeth intimated his dissent across the table.) Did his Noble Friend deny that they must begin again after the lapse of seven years ? He hoped he did not misunderstand the Bill. Did it not provide that the assessment which might be made now by the Commissioners should terminate in seven years ? Was it so or not ?—( Here the Noble Lord read one of the clauses of the Bill, by which it is provided that the ar rangements under the Bill which shall be made by the Com missioners shall continue in force till 1843, and afterwards, unless Parliament should otherwise direct.) So then this was to be the final measure—the final settlement—of this long agitated question.—( Cheers.) At the cud of seven years, Parliament must be again called upon to reconsider an ar rangement which they had been told was to be final. That House never showed any unwillingness to provide for the edu cation of the people of Ireland. At the present time they voted 20,0001. a year for the purposes of education in Ireland. He felt confident that, if required, the House, in place of 20,0001., would not hesitate to grant 50,000/. Now, it was fully admitted that 50,000/. was the very utmost that could be expected for the purposes of education, under the resolution to which the House came last Session. This Bill differed in other points from that of last Session. It proposed, in the first place, that there should be a reduction of 30 per cent., a reduction of Si. in consideration of freeing the Clergy from the inconveniences and trouble of collection, and a fur ther reduction of 23 : per cent. So far he did not differ much from the provisions of the Bill. It was not expedient, for many reasons, that their income should be collected by the Clergy themselves under any regulation. It would be a far preferable course to have it collected from the landlords by the Commissioners of land revenue. In the Bill he should submit to the House he proposed a reduction of 35 per cent., besides the 23- per cent. What he should propose was, to give the Ecclesiastical Commissioners a power of deal ing with such landlords as might be disposed to redeem the rent-charges, and of making agreements with them, founded either upon a money or a land security, Os upon a security consisting partly in land and partly in money, with a power by mutual consent of altering the security on the death of the incumbent. He was glad to see that, in the pre sent Bill, Ministers had abjured the absurdity of founding their calculations on parishes and not on benefices. —( Cheers.) This objection to the measure of last year was pressed forcibly upon them, but they would listen to no objections. They would not alter the Bill. No. The House of Lords was to be calum- niated, and therefore they persevered.—( Cheers.) Now, however, they seemed convinced of their error, and therefore they proposed to legislate not upon parishes but upon benefices. He totally objected to the extraordinary, the irresponsible powers conferred by this Bill. It did not indeed leave the Lord Lieutenant much to do, but the Secretary of State and the chief Commissioner of land revenue had most extraordi- nary and extensive powers conferred upon them. They were vested with a full and complete controul over all the interests, both spiritual and temporal, of the Church of Ireland. It af forded the most ample opportunities for jobbing. He now came to the propositions of his Noble Friend ( Lord Morpc-qh), with respect to the amount of income, its distribution, and the likeli hood there was of a surplus. His Noble Friend contended there would be a surplus. He should like to know from whence it was to arise. There were 129 benefices of 501. a-year ; 670 of 1001., 209 of 3001., 188 of 300/., and 54 of 300/., and no Clergyman was to have an income exceeding 500/. except in . . towns and cities. Now he totally objected — to this provision which excluded a country clergyman from any income exceed ing 5001. a year. It was not a wise or a just provision. It was inconsistent with the policy and with the Practice of the Church. It could be productive of no good, either in a spi ritual or in a temporal point of view. The income of the Irish Bishops was limited to a sum varying from 4,0001. to 5,000/. a year, 2,0001. being the highest. Now, was it to be said that between 5,0001. and 5001. a year there wag to be no gap, no intermediate amount of greater approximation between these two sums ? Could this be called equalization of Church property ?—(Cheers.) Nothing could be more unfair, or more unjust. But even taking 1781. as the minimum income, and 598/. as the maximum, he must tell his Noble Friend that still he would have no surplus. His Noble Friend, however, stated with great confidence that he would have a surplus of 97,0001., 50,000/. of which was to be applied for purposes of general education, and the remaining 47,0001. to go to the Consolidated Fund. But was his Noble Friend to get no more—did he expect no more ? If not, this Bill was most strangely and unaccountably framed.—(Cheers.) If his Noble Friend expected no more at present, a power must be vested somewhere of reducing the income of the Church, of declar ing a minimum as well as a maximum, and thus raising the surplus to 334,0001. His Noble Friend made a surplus of 97,000/. by declaring the maximum he should give. But, suppose he was to assume a maximum, he might then raise his surplus. If the Bill passed, and he confidently hoped it would nut, the following would be the situation as to several of the benefices of Ireland:— 159 at 50/. £ 6,450 670 at 100/. 209 at 3001. 188 at 300/. 54 at 3001. There was power given by the Bill that in cases in which the Protestant population was not under 3,000, the income might be raised to 4001.; but there was no power given of an ade quate increase of income in cases where the population ex ceeded 3,000. Why were the glebe lands not to be applied ? He saw no provision for their application in this Bill.— ( Cheers.) It was true that the Noble Lord (Morpeth) was so liberal as to give 32/. in glebe lands to the Church. What was the intention with regard to the rest of that property ? —( Cheers.) They ought to know this.--( Cheers.) The Commissioners of land revenue were vested with a power of managing the glebe property. Was it, or was it not,in tended to apply the glebe lands towards the maintenance of the Roman Catholic Clergy ? By the powers given in this Bill, the head Commissioner, or the Secretary of State, might appoint a curate or not, just as it pleased them—they might diminish the income of the benefices, and hand over the sur plus for the uses of the civil government. He for one should never consent to an alienation of Church property for civil purposes. He would never consent to vest such power in any Government. It was not impossible that a Secretary of State, having thus acted as trustee for the Church, might afterwards make himself residuary legatee. He would never consent to anything of the kind, and he trusted a British Parliament would never be found to concur in it.—( Hear, hear, hear, and loud cheers.) Suppose a time should come when there was a great pressure from without for the reduc tion of a penny tax. Above all, let it be a tax upon know ledge—(Cheers and a laugh)—and' that the Chancellor of the Exchequer, from the state of the finances, opposed the motion on the ground that be had no surplus. Might not a Secretary of State say to him, " You have a surplus—there is the Irish Church.—(Cheers.) You have been improvident —you have indulged these bloated Clergy too much—screw them more tightly.—(Cheers.) Declare that the maximum shall be 1001. in place of 300/, and you thus get 330,0001. to dispose of."—(Cheers.) He would not trust any Govern ment with such a discretion. He would now, with the per mission of the House, state what his own views were, and the outlines of the measure he would propose ; and first as re garded the distribution of Church property. The present average income of the beneficed Clergy of Ireland was 3501. a year. His principal reason for proposing any reduction was to reduce inequalities. The first thing ho must . look at was the present state of town parishes as regarded income. There were none of the Irish Clergy in a worse situation than those of towns and cities. In many such cases there was little or no provision made for them in any degree commensurate to the laborious duties they had to discharge. The deficiency was made up by contributions from the parishioners. He did not approve of such a course as this. There were cases in which the Clergyman of a town had a country parish also, from which he derived some little additional income. Even with such as sistance it often happened that where he had a population of 8,000 or 10,000 to attend to, the income did not exceed 500/. ' The town of Belfast was one of this kind. It formed only one parish, and contained a population of 17,942 belonging to the Established Church. The income was no more than 300/. a year. The arebdeaconry of Dublin was another case. It embraced three parishes, having a population of 15,599. There were sixteen Clergymen employed, and they had eleven churches to attend. Now, in the average taken in the mea sure of Ministers this archdeaconry was taken as a single be nefice. He would propose that the Commissioners should in quire into the present state of the Clergy in cities and towns ; that they should report the number of Protestants in each, the extent of the duties they had to perform, which had and had not glebe houses, the state of accommodation as to churches, the amount of the net revenue in each, and the sources from which it arose. He would then propose that the Report of the Commissioners be laid before the Privy Council, who would decide in what cases the union of another parish adjoining the town might be emvenient, and where it would be proper to erect glebe houses where they were not at present, or to repair such as were in need of it. He proposed that inquiry should be made into benefices of an income from 501. to 3001., and the nature of the duties to be performed. The great objec tion to the measure proposed by Ministers before was, that they dealt only with the amount of income, without considering the duties to be performed. In this Bill the " objection was that they dealt with the amount of population alone, not taking into account the extent over which that population was spread. With a population spread over an extent of forty or fifty miles the duties might be more heavy though the population was not one-fifth that of another parish much more limited in extent. He proposed, more over, that the Commissioners should report every case in which the income was as high as 5001. and as low as 1001. and under, and state their opinion as to the cases in which it would be proper that the income should be reduced from 500/., or raised from 1001. and under. He proposed that the extent of no parish should exceed 30 miles, and also that the Commissioners should have power to reduce the income if the population was one hundred, the income being 5001., but not to reduce it below 300/. He mentioned the sum of 3001. because it was that proposed upon a former occasion, when this subject was last before the House, and he felt satisfied it was the least that could reason ably be proposed—the least upon which a clergyman could support himself and family in any way approaching to comfort. He would also propose that the surplus between the income and the fund ultimately to be left should be appropriated to ' Wards the erection of glebe houses in benefices possessing none. - A church without a minister was useless, but a glebe house, however small, could always afford a sufficient accom modation for a congregation, and nothing, he would say, could compensate for the absence of a resident clergyman:— (Hear, hear.) If the circumstance s o f th e par i s h s h ou ld ap pear to require it—if there should be a congregation which rendered a church necessary, or if th e c h urc h was insufficient for the congregation—then he should p ro p ose th a t a f ter t h e provision for the glebe h ou s es th e surp l us s h ou ld b e appl i ed in the erection of a church ; but, beyond these merely local purposes, he proposed that the surplus should be paid into the general fund of the Commissioners, for the purpose of aug menting small livings.—( Hear, hear.) He did not propose indefinitely to augment them. No, he proposed to prohibit the Commissioners from making an augmentation in any case beyond 300/. p er an num for ay benefice not situated within a town ; and he would prohibit them from making a re puction below that amount. He did not mean to say that there were not some cases in which the Commissioners might beneficially leave to clergymen incomes of 500/. or 600/. per annum ; but he certainly did not propose to al low the Commissioners to raise the amount in any case be yond 300/. in country parishes. He, however, intended to give this power to the Commissioners : if there should be a parish which exceeded forty miles in extent, or with a congre tion of the Established Church, exceeding 1,000 persons, he should then propose to allow the Commissioners to divide the benefice, each of the clergymen to receive not more than 300/. a year ; and he would say that he infinitely preferred such divisions of large parishes, and the appointment of two clergymen with moderate incomes, than to leaving a large parish with a considerable income to any one clergyman.— ( Hear.) He now believed that he had stated to the House the means by which he proposed to raised the fund, and the objects to which he intended to apply the fund when it should be raised. With regard to the town parishes, his Noble Friend in his Bill left it a little vague as to what he intended the incomes of those parishes to be. He ( Lord Stanley) would propose that, in the first instance, an augmentation should be made when the income was less than 400/. or 5001. per an num. He believed that he had now stated the provisions of the measure which he was about to submit to the House. Having done this much he wished to ask the Hon. Member who had cheered him if he now thought that he (Lord Stan ley) was desirous of maintaining a luxurious clergy ? He did entreat Hon. Gentlemen, if they really wished to give peace to Ireland and to settle this question by doing justice and by making reasonable concessions, to hesitate bef o re they joined with his Majesty's Government in refusing him (Lord Stanley) leave to submit to them a measure which he knew met with the concurrence of those who never could concur in the ab- IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. ROUSE OF COMMONS, Juivis 1. IRISH CHURCH BILL. Lord STANLEY'S speech, in continuation from our Second Editiion of last night, said— * * * * * * * He had never cut down for the pleasure o; cutting down alone— (Hear) —he had cut down in one place merely for the purpose of beneficially applying the surplus elsewhere. In the first place, with regard to amount, it was pro posed to reduce no less than ten bishoprics by that Bill ; it was also proposed to relieve the people of Ireland from the payment of a tax for the maintenance of their own clergy to no less an amount than 60,0004. per annum.—(Hear.) The owner of Bishop leases were enabled to acquire a permanent possession of that of which they had only a leasehold before.—(Hear.) There was also provided by the Bill the augmentation of benefices, the erection of churches, and the erection also of glebe houses when-required. Such were the objects which they had sought to obtain by the reductions they proposed, in various matters in the revenues of the Church of Ire land. Now the first reduction was the one he had al ready stated—of the abolition of a certdn number of Bishoprics. The next in amount was the tix imposed after the termination of existing interests in two other Bishoprics. There was also a graduated tax im posed on all benefices beyond a certain amount—the object of that tax was not to produce a complete and general equality among all livings, but to take a large portion from those who could better spare it, and apply the surplus to those which needed it. He did not stand there to say the principles adopted were in all respects correct. The re ductions were with respect to income alone, and had no thing to do with consideration. He wished he could sa tisfy his Noble Friend, and he thought he could, if it were not for false pride or false fame, that the Bill proposed by the late Government was calculated to operate most bene ficially. Now, what was the object of Lord Grey ? Why, that Noble Earl stated the church cess to be 60,000/., and his calculation in that respect was not far from correct, as the Ecclesiastical Commise:oaers had stated it at up wards of 59,000!. But Lord Grey conceived that a larger sum was necessary- for the augmentation of small livings, for the purpose of raising them to a miserable pittance of 200/. a year for under clergymen : that he calculated would require 40,000/., the building of new churches 20,0001., glebe houses 10,0001. ; and together with the other bene fits intended by the Bill, a Permanent income would be required of 156,000/. Setting aside all cases of augmen tation, all cases of glebe lands, and all cases of building ad ditional churches, what was the charge which the Ecclesi- astical Commissioners reported, after overcoming, great diffi culties, as a constant permanent charge ? They stated that 69,090/. was the ordinary current expense, without providing for one of those purposes which were the objects for which the deductions were made. What was the revenue of which they were in the receipt? They were in the receipt of 29,0001.: 29,0001. was the sum with which they had to meet the current, regular, constant expense of 69,000!., without providing for one of the objects that were in view. That fund, as was proved by the calculations of notaries, would not be out of debt till the year 1573, so that till that time, they would have to postpone indefinitely, till the year 1873, every object that was contemplated by the Church Temporalities Act. What was the revenue which the Church Commissioners had this year ? They had a consi derable revenue—a revenue of 185,000/., which was a large revenue undoubtedly. But how was this made up? How much of it was income, and how much capital ? How much of it was that on which they could rely, and bow much that upon which they could not only not rely, but which would undoubtedly and for ever diminish their actual re ceipts? Of this 185,0001. the House would hardly believe it that not less than 150,545/., was no portion of their an nual income. —(Load cheers.) Of what did it consist ? They bad sold out 11,000/. Stock, losing of course the fu ture interest ; they had let the demesnes of two Irish bishoprics—a fund which they had calculated upon as per manent rent ; but, for the purpose of raising a large present income, they had levied large fines to the amount of (as we understood) 4,000/. ; they had had a loan from Government to the amount of 46,0001. ; so that these and other sums, amounting altogether to 150,5451., were to be deducted from the net income of 185,000/. This included a balance in hand of 17,000/.—(Loud cheers from the Opposition.) This was the state of the fund on which they were to rely for the augmentation of small livings, and on which they were to rely for the building of churches. He stated this on the authority of the Commissioners themselves. He should have added that the amount of 46,000/. was not all they bad got, because they had actually borrowed by anticipation of 56,000/. They had run up a pretty debt to Government of 100,000/. in the first two years. Had they got that money to deal with ? Not at all.—(Hear, hear.) The 46,000/. was actually en gaged for at the present moment by contracts, which were of so pressing a nature that they would not bear to he postponed for the present year.—(Hear, bear.) Let the House bear with him while he read an extract from the Report of the Commissioners, stating the -applica tions that were made to them, and the means they had of meeting them. The Noble Lord then read extracts from the Report, in which the Commissioners stated that one of the most onerous duties engaging their attention was that of repairing churches and chapels ; that as the state of the Commissioners' Fund only admitted of their building six churches, and as delay only increased the evil, they deemed it prudent and indispensable to enter into engagements to the amount of 75,0001., o f w hi c h sum 21,0001. was re served and set apart from their general residue ; and the residue of the unappropriated 100,0001., which the Com missioners of public works were authorised to advance, engagementsthe repair of provision in greater was made applicable . for th a t p urpose ; t h at i t was to be observed, not that in mde for a the number of churches Ireland ; that applications had been received by the Commissioners, not only for the enlarge ment of several churches where the accommodation had been stated to be insufficient for th e res p ect i ve congregations, but also for the rebuilding and erecti on o f 60 c h urches ; that in many of these applications the parties had expressed their willingness to contribute . sums from 60/. to 6 00/., and that as soon as they had funds for that purpo se th e wants of the parties would be satisfied. He should like to know when that would be ? This was the case he had to deal with—here were pressing and imp or t ant d eman d s. With this bankrupt fund , and in the teeth of the resolu tion of that House, which expressly decl are d t h at no por tion of it should be appropriated to any bat church pur poses, until the wants of the church were provided for —(Hear)—his Noble Friend called upon them to adopt his Here was evidence, undisputed, underned, that the provisions for the accommodation of the Protestant congregations of Ire land were utterly insufficient at this moment. There were 535 benefices that had no glebes, and there were 210 bene fices that had no churches ; and these deficien c i es an d wants o f . the people were to be supplied, was said, out of a fund that must continue to be bankrupt until 1873 .—(Cheers.) It had been declared over and over again by the members of the Go vernment, and by others who supported thein, and indeed by the resolution of the House itself, that not one farthing of the fund should be applied to any other purpose until all the wants of the Protestant population of Ireland should b e f u ll y pro ' vided for. These were the sentiments of the resolution. Parliament was pledged to make this provision before they suffered a single shilling to be devoted to a ly oth er purposes . —( Cheering.) It had been said that the Church of Ireland was a pampered luxurious church, that it was too plethoric, and wanted blood-letting. Upon this point he would'take his street principle laid down in the other Bill.—(ll,T'Bbielia.r. The Noble Lord then moved for leave t o brin g in n" The question having been put from the the ir, fusion nec a " Lord JOHN RUSSELL rose, but on Noble b si e o n n e e h d es b l y eav a in g 7 ee th at e H n iolu m s b e e , r pr o e f ve A n l t e e m a b h e is re pr o o n ce t e l d ic i n Oi b f i o p r os s i o tl irl minutes. Wh'en order had been at length restored, — Lo l rd to p o r k oc o e c e c d a e si d on to , sadird,rebsesfothree mHyouNseobilnetlFieriefonldlocwoinint e:teetr;e:di. to propose to him that he should have an opportunity! o it , n ito subjectwas theto NcVhholeichetoi thought fit, to bring in any Bill he might have prepared rr pr.o di It posal. I find no fault with him for taking that course, but think, certainly, I am at liberty to draw this inference from the course he has taken, that it is no other than und en er e _ o f m sl Y ee NcohblheeFhriaesndjunsott e to "e a c lu c d e e p c trheafet. they name, a course of opposition to the second r m as nif_ ti this Bill.—(Loud cheers.) If my Noble Friend had eked to introduce a Bill upon this subject, it was in his p etce t . in have done so, either at some time before the measure Noble Friend the Secretary for Ireland was introduced, ?` after the motion for its introduction had be en made, or isr some subsequent stage of the measure.—(Hear.) It emir therefore, on the principle of our Bill, to which he cannot 0. Friend sent, that my Noble Friend tests the issue of ofhis quest!o —( Hear, hear.) lam glad to find that my Noble• does not deny that this is the real question before the Hon s e e al I am glad to find that he does not deny that the re question is, whether the principle of this Bill shall n s ill not be adopted.—( Loud cheers.) Now, Sir, lam as v . v ing as my Noble Friend to appeal to the reason and mon 1- tion of the people of England upon this subject. It is te e the, reason and moderation of the people of England that I aPP! e a . „ —not on the details, not on the regulations, but on the ru t ciple on which this Bill is founded.—(Cheers.) Sir, althougu my Noble Friend, at the commencement of his speech, all" , pealed to the reason and moderation of the people 0f to land, I cannot forget that he afterwards appealed from them the feelings of this House, as a House of gentlemen. I 11° Fei Sir, that it is a House of gentlemen, but I always thought was something else beside ; I hope it is a House representin it fi popular feelings and popular interests.— (Cheers.) I her, ' is a House representing (as it is the duty of Membe rs of tn House to do), not particular and local bodies of men , but rei presenting, as Mr. Burke stated he considered himself bounty to do, the whole people of this empire, including among the„ that outlawed portion of the people—the six millions of Tr e man Catholics in Ireland.—(Loud cheers.) Sir, my N° ee Friend, in the whole course of his speech, although he verted to all the considerations, or very nearly all till considerations, connected with this Bill, totally ornate one most important consideration, namely, the O n : sideration and concern which this House ought to Pa; to the interests of three-fourths of the people of Ire ; land.—(Cheers.) My Noble Friend told us that w ought not to overlook the interests of the children of doll; men, and that it was a painful reflection for a clergyman tba he could not leave to his children a competence after b: death. Undoubtedly this is a very painful situation. B ut did not occur to my Noble Friend, or if it did not occur to him, I hope it will to Hon. Members of this House—did Ann' occur to my Noble Friend that there are others, not in t ie e situation of clergymen, that there are the Roman Cath°' l " • people of Ireland, who, too, have to consider what is due tered their children and their families, and who may be permitbe to ask, when this score of 400,0001. is levied, wha t is the benefit which they arc to derive from the expenditure of t ll money ?—( Hear, hear.) Sir, I say at once—for it is as W e d that I should as early as possible place this Bill on the grou t °, , on which I think it ought to stand—that our notion 01 e Church Establishment is, that it is not intended for the P r r pagation of any offspring, but for the instruction of the peoPler; —(Great cheering.) In the course of the last century ti le ': ; were eminent men who wrote and discoursed upon the p rinel ; ples and the grounds on which the State ought to suPP3 rt e er Church Establishment. lam not going to fatigue the H°l6 with any quotations from their writings ; when I mention s names of Warburton and Paley, every man will knowlll. degree of weight is to be attached to their authority. l u t i e doctrines differed very widely from each other. It was ,;`,,• opinion of Warburton that the Church was naturally and enirt; cally the ally of the State ; it was held by Paley to be a co m e perversion of the intention of a Church Establishment to 0' n° sider it as the ally of the State at all ; but both these* mei; both able and enlightened men, and fully competent to graPPd with the subject of which they wrote, both understood n ° ,, a both maintained that by a Church is meant the Church of t",, majority of the people. This was the understanding °lf which those able and learned men wrote upon the Chure % and this was the principle on which they considered that tnt Church ought to be supported. I do not mean to say td; this doctrine ever can be carried to its full extent in Irela° it is not my intention even to propose to carry it to the extetii to which they did; but this I maintain, and this I ever slinia maintain, that the interests of the great body of the Pe n F be ought not to be overlooked; and that when you ta lk of t duty of a State, the duty of a State is not to choo se and sett: leo. that doctrine which the Leeislature or the supreme 11 ~, thority may consider to be founded in truth , but to endeayn" d n to secure the means by which they can inculcate religion morality among the great body of the people.—( Loud c heer, ing.) If we were to maintain any other opinion , or to fon ; a Church upon any other doctrine, we should be extending 1",, Hindostan the Cler of the established Church of E n g lan and spreading throughout our dominions—among the Rome': Catholics of Canada and the members of the various persuasions to be found in our numerous possessions in dine; rent parts of the globe—the form of the Church of Eng lan" j and insisting on their conformity to that faith__(Ch eers ' It is impossible that we can maintain any such Pro; position; if we did so, our Church, which is so usefu l in tw, country, which serves so many high and stable purpose:" would become in those places merely a nest of sinecue. 11; and while you took care that there were clergymen 'fich sufficient revenues, you would be totally neglecting that wi)10 it is the business of the State to provide —namely, that .'ne great body of the people shall have the means of recei lo f religious and moral instruction. Now, Sir, both the B'lfer last year, and that which my Noble Friend the Secreta ry lreland has introduced this year, proceed upon the priii el i P, that while you preserve to the Protestant Church of Ire, ;: , whateter is necessary for the spiritual instruction of the testants, yet that any surplus which can be derived froinroc, revenues shall be applied to the religious and moral tion of the great majority of the people.—( Cheers.) ma. meaning of this is, that you shall not consider the great d id jority of the people, as my Noble Friend ( Lord StanleY ) t bat throughout his speech, as mere blanks in the empire, bu t c ote you shall provide them, not with a Church Establishmtioo according to their own faith, but with a system of edit e ca . e od which you can fairly give, and which, as my Noble rod ( Lord Morpeth) declares, Parliament is ready to atrur u ' t eat to endow, if necessary, with the sum of 20,000/. a year --- e ,ne: you shall give this education to the great body of the lielft a jl that you shall make it a part of your duty, and that you '_ ea t, consider it part and parcel of your ecclesiastical establisbn'tical This I think is the broad and general view of ecclesitr r of purposes. This is the view which takes in a vast nutri n . e m eo'' people, who, if you confine yourselves to my Noble Fe le oe ot (Lord Stanley's) proposition, can never derive anY 1 3 ., e 0 whatever from the distribution of those funds, and w" m ag ! g reason of their not deriving any benefit from them, tw e e t re'.. respects the State, duly furnished with the means of te r d .•••••' ligious and moral instruction which it is bound to sineideoC, pCheers.) Having thus stated what I consider to be th e 'pre' rinciple of this Bill, I think it follows that I shall not he so ble pared to withdraw it in favour of the proposition of n'y te Friend opposite.—(Loud cheers.) I will not imit a ; 0 00 Noble Friend's example. He has made it matter of r e P c i e ieli! to us that we have altered and conceded some of the Pr° ro oo of last year. I will not undervalue, far less will I I ' f t: it . tbe or taunt him with any proposition he has now made 13 - 0 0 44 reform of the Church of Ireland, to which he which c od not disposed to accede last year ; on the contrary, I val ' i l :ty b e highly any proposition coming from him with the autho;neet, • is empowered to give it. He will permit me to say, I°) d lea° that these propositions leave altogether out of sight, an We altogether untouched, that great principle which We.eiefor maintained—that great principle on which I had thVotecet: tune to differ from my Noble Friend when w e were /declare' together—that great principle on which the House ow fen; its solemn opinion last year.—( Loud cheers.) I wil l Il e o r 01 .0 ture to state, before I proceed to other questions, or c l e, vn e points on which 1 think my Noble Friend has n in eee of e tb e e not say an unfair, but I cannot think a politic, use r over alterations in our present Bill. It was one of the r e P ee rti ° • which was cast upon our Bill of last year, that the Pr°,least' the Church—the collection and disposition of it, coin mc was altogether transferred into the hands of jj e sioners of Land Revenue. It certainly appears f r° , t to t . b ports of what passed in the House of Lords in Braret egliotti subject, that this was one of the parts of the they refused their consent, on the ground that it le Lo ri, Lorci , tion of principle. I know it was stated by one Non a olen 1 ,;: have no objection to state his name—l mean lAr.„joioll e rough—that it might be expedient to give the Correic of Land Revenue the power of collecting this in ° b time, but that he thought that after a time the princlgileet;ge;,ll4 prevail, and the collection of the revenue go to tir e f e o ust;o: whom, in his opinion, and in that of a majority ut . T_ e o ints ,e Lords, it ought properly to rest. This is one of tn o e t e eing , which, feeling that we conceded no principle in s o , Son o lf made a concession ; and it is one of the o bjects e "' o l v esien ;Olcie j, Friend opposite to attack that concession and that p. the Bill, and to subject us to reproach, because eve e l l e av o e m .' oPP., ° (, • to what we thought in the conscientious opinio!l l ef the 13l c i it., nents, was one of the great obstacles to the nrr inli d9 e see res ,' —( Hear, hear.) A great part of my Nobl r eeas n t ee was taken up in pointing out the faults of forren on . but a very small portion was occupied in po! jv . I ' e j! faults of the particular measure introduced IV de vot. e , Friend (Lord Morpeth). A considerable portion v r 7 s ' ent a r a i; to a detail of the inconveniences which where there is a very small income, a lar great number of parishes (which is undo r. em e i l w i e b , fault of the present system), and a great na g for " for the Ci fiear in showing the inadequacy of the fund proy ow _ _ ro e temporalities. Why, that is a fault of his ti vie ha ve hear.) My Noble Friend attacked the scroll. adequlbienrae. posed, which I think a very adequate cetio _L ts ra ore . 1 , go- should say, for the purpose ; but at all near (S l ' f3 irlf than that which the Bight Hon. Baronett r rnig e ll „ t prin' Bert Peel) stated last year, as the one which effect t"'", s e rof have adopted, if we had wished knowyo: for w hat Pti t r e stio.l ciple of our Bill.—( Hear.) I n geuPba°tteP.d"Pilyatioenne' af,:reee4dS something better than the Bill before were tak e° I t ies 11 • tbe.' that even if a moderate scale of income on the ,e, Noble Friend opposite stated it, if it twbocreuonnostents bsoui!`"sa3f6l; cient for the clergymen, he would shlr t , s not ro d° t the P r° l7 Well, Sir, we have taken a scale which e n e n e, s no , roY pi l e could quote, that sufficient provision N fo : e o se n ; position of the Right Hon. Baronet a t first lace: tqy p . • Noble Lord, after attacking, in the t F i ' e r c ie ._ nd ( t i e l l e ls ar r , b i e t a i r s . )objelcttiohninakbleit biost rather , tou .e. p